topic Re: Some library parts unintentionally clean-up with each ot in Libraries & objects

Some library parts unintentionally clean-up with each other

Anonymous — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 02:57:45 GMT

Hello,
For some time now I have noticed that some of my library parts
do not show a corner or joint between two instances placed such that
they touch each other.

For example, I have a library part that makes some standard
profile moldings and I use it to say make baseboard that follows
a set of walls. In AC 8.1 and in AC 9.0 the miter corner edges
do not show in 3D.

Has anyone else noticed this type of behavior ?

Is this an intentional feature or a bug ?
Thank you,
Peter Devlin

Re: Some library parts unintentionally clean-up with each ot

Aussie John — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 05:05:31 GMT

Its always a feature. If you want then to not join you will need to give them different material definitions

Re: Some library parts unintentionally clean-up with each ot

Anonymous — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 10:38:01 GMT

just wondering if you are experiencing the same problem as is currently being discussed in this thread?

http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?p=30731#30731

Re: Some library parts unintentionally clean-up with each ot

Anonymous — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 17:02:36 GMT

John,
I don't mean the S/E window, I mean the 3D window.
Of course in section they clean-up if they have the same material.

Woody,it's not the same problem.

If I make a row of several instances of this molding object, end to end,
and then assign every other instance a different material,
then, in the 3D window, I can see the joint lines between them.
It is as if the 3D window is behaving like the S/E window but
not completely, if set an instance of the molding object exactly
at the edge of a slab, with both having the same material,
they do not clean-up with each other, as has always been the case
with objects and tool elements.

I'm going to experiment with some Archicad library objects
to see if I can duplicate this behavior.

Thanks for posting back,
Peter Devlin

Re: Some library parts unintentionally clean-up with each ot

Anonymous — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 18:10:47 GMT

Hello,
I have checked a few AC library parts and have found that
I get the same behavior.
I think it has something to do with the uses of
CUTPLANE or CUTPOLYA in the 3D scripts, maybe.

If the "beam2_1" object", from the RoofMaker library,
is set to zero pitch (horizontal), and two instances are placed end to end,
the top and bottom edges at the joint between them do not show in 3D.
The same is true of "plate beam2_1" from the same library.

What really shows what I have run into often is illustrated
by placing an instance of the "Footing" object from the
Add-on library/Accessories library/Slab Accessories.
Just place an instance of it, as is, without changing any parameters,
view in the 3D window, at 270°, in "hidden line" mode, and you
will see that the lower left corner of the object does not show
the vertical edges.

Please check it out and tell me if you see the same thing.
Thank you,
Peter Devlin

Re: Some library parts unintentionally clean-up with each ot

Anonymous — Fri, 04 Feb 2005 21:22:55 GMT

Hello,
To do some further tests with this issue of
disappearing edges at joints, I made two very
simple objects.

The first, called "edges disappearing prism.gsm",
is a PRISM_ command that draws a bar shape 1 meter long,
0.1 meters wide, and 0.05 meters tall.
Two CUTPLANE commands are issued in the script that
cut 0.01 meters off the left and right ends of this bar shape.
If two instances of this object are placed in the plan, end to end,
the joint between them does not show when viewed in the 3D window.

The second object called "edge disappearing tube.gsm" was made
by Profiler and is a 0.1 meter wide by 0.05 meter high polygon
following a 2 meter long by 1 meter high rectangular path.
The object is made with the TUBE command.

When viewed in the 3D window the lower left corner edges do
not show just like the Slab Accessories "Footing.gsm" object.

see attachment.

Please try these objects and tell me whether they behave
in the way I describe.
Thank you,
Peter Devlin